On what issue should City Council focus?

Jason Varsoke: "I'd like to see City Council put up more bike lanes, and I don't even own a bike."

Hook staff

Ryan Murphy: "From New York to Nigeria, the most important thing is education. A lot of programs, arts programs, are always in danger because of budget cuts and whatnot. It's really hard to see those in the potential line of fire."

Hook staff

Tamara Wright: "I'd like to see them focus on something for minor children to do other than sneak into bars, drink alcohol in the parks, sneak into movies, and wreak general havoc on the Downtown Mall."

27 comments

booo! July 20th, 2011 | 10:45am

Overspending.

City Resident July 20th, 2011 | 11:15am

Eliminating the RWSA - they have wasted tens of millions of dollars on bogus studies to support a dam we don't need and to stop dredging --unltil we get rid of this agency we will see our rates rise and our environmental assets destroyed.

This is the most corrupt organization ever in the history of Charlottesville and we need to elect City Councilors that say enough waste --no more debt for unneeded infrastructure and the City should maintain their own assets if needed and make money for their citizens. They own all the dams and reservoirs and to watch them be destroyed is the height of foolishness.

Citizen Party July 20th, 2011 | 12:01pm

Anything but Water supply and parkway. Not having sitting mayors endorse candidates in an election. Jobs for poor people. Improving the schools. The Dialogue on Race. Improving neighborhoods.

City Resident July 20th, 2011 | 1:05pm

CP, I guess you are in favor of higher utility rates for the poor and less money for schools. Water rates have been rising so high that the City has been subsidizing them to keep them affordable, but they can't do that forever, and that money could go to the schools.

It's your money and if you want it wasted on a dam and uphill pipeline to fill Ragged Mt. that's your choice not mine.

The more expensive you make utility rates the more unattractive our community will be for new businesses or citizens.

meanwhile..... July 20th, 2011 | 1:10pm

The city should start charging money to anyone other than city residents that want to set foot inside of city limits. This city is OURS and everyone else should leave!

solution July 20th, 2011 | 1:30pm

It is not city council who needs to focus on issues, it is the people. I'm so tired of city council working for themselves and not the people.

NancyDrew July 20th, 2011 | 1:33pm

At the very least electing councilors that put city interests before county would be a welcome change.

This is going to be a very interesting election, for a change we have a real choice --candidates that side with the county over city residents, and candidates that want to work with the county in a reasonable manner, but put city interests first.

Sam July 20th, 2011 | 1:45pm

We already have big plans we are waiting for checks on. We are waiting on our $100 million check from the federal government to redo public housing. We need $1 million or so to run our bus system next year.. The check to re- do the Belmont Bridge we are waiting on from the State. The SRO at Vinegar Hill is funded (I think)? We have already spent the revenue sharing check from Albemarle. We think of plans then wait for other localities/Feds to send the checks. Start mailing them for the old ideas because its time for new ideas.

jeezlouise July 20th, 2011 | 3:12pm

1. Stop the Bypass
2. Speed bumps every 25 feet on 29. Bike lanes excluded.
3. Take parking area and/or traveling lanes and convert to bike lanes.
4. Coupons for bike purchases.
5. A bike in every driveway.
6. Close 64 from Shadwell to 120. Reroute traffic onto 250
7. Close 250 at 29 ramp. Route traffic on 29
8. Close one lane 29 for roadwork.
9. Time the lights incorrectly
10. Travel to Ghana.

ntk July 20th, 2011 | 4:03pm

sidewalks and decriminalizing marijuana in Cville

Citizen Party July 20th, 2011 | 4:04pm

Nancy Drew: "candidates that want to work with the county in a reasonable manner, but put city interests first", yep, I think Galvin Blount and Huja an maybe Beyer would do that.

City Resident: what I had in mind was a plan that allows for growth over the years, assures businesses that they can relocate here because we will have water for them and reasonable transportation routes into the City, then the can hire people in the City, and also add to our tax base so we can pay for services, improve neighborhoods. Also a plan where when we need more water we won't be paying 2020 rates on construction. I say dredge and dam. or we could have income sensitive water rates, I am game for that.
The more crazy and inconsistent our City Council operates, the less businesses will want to locate here, or is that the plan?

I am no County capitulator, but I think we should have Councilors who can work with the County in a reasonable way. The most recent CT article on the water supply plan shows that the dredgers are not being forthcoming and are confusing the pubic debate. If they,(an elite small group I submit) are really pissed off, do a referendum and leave the Council to move on t other business like revenue generating activities and equity oriented activities. Or maybe they can't get the number of signatures needed for a ref. That tells you something. Party on Citizens.

Betty July 20th, 2011 | 4:27pm

How about this? . . . for a population of 145,000 it is completely wasteful to have so much duplication of effort. With all the anti-growth sentiment, the area will never reach a size to warrant two school systems, two fire departments, two governing bodies, two court systems, two assessors, etc..

Let's bite the bullet now and "unincorporate" Charlottesville and merge, save a ton of money and force us all to work together.

All this independent city stuff in Virginia is so lame and wasteful.

jeezlouise July 20th, 2011 | 4:32pm

CAMELOT WILL NEVER FALL BETTY! NEVER!

TJ July 20th, 2011 | 5:19pm

I actually talked to Mr. Tucker once about this, former County Executive, and he said: studies have shown this would not amount to a savings. Just telling you what he said

martin July 20th, 2011 | 6:08pm

Please make Park Street like it was before "traffic calming". Those islands are dangerous, particularly at night.It impossible for a large vehicle to turn on to Park Street where the islands are without going into the opposite lane.

What you heard is someone who didn't want to be the one of TWO chief executives to go. Consider the source on that one, then ask to see the numbers and audit the devil out of them. NEVER simply accept anything from a bureaucrat with a vested interest.

What is it with people taking comments like that at face value?

Figures can't lie, but liars can figure.

City Resident July 20th, 2011 | 6:45pm

CP, I think you must be one of the pro dam/ anti dredge crowd. Anyone who thinks the Nature Conservancy and RWSA would give info that supported dredging must have been out of the country for many years . Every time we get close to dredging they panic and put out new numbers --we are on to their game by now --one two many wolves in their company.

And as for a referendum on where Charlottesville wants to spend their money and resources for water --let's see who gets nominated . The three you mention Huja, Galvin and Beyer are part of your pro dam camp. So let's see what the public thinks of them when they go to vote on August 20th.

If the majority of the voters want to destroy Ragged Mt. Natural Area, let the South Fork Reservoir silt in, and build a new 30 ft earthen dam ( creating a reservoir that can't fill without a pipeline); then pay for a new uphill pipeline from South Fork Reservoir ( cost unknown, but upward of $60 million ).

If they vote for your 3 candidates, then we'll watch untold destruction and cost for infrastructure we may never need.

Let the people be heard on August 20th at Burley Middle School.
That will be the referendum. Any councilor foolish enough to squander so much money and city owned natural resources will not get my vote.

Citizen Party July 20th, 2011 | 10:33pm

I think Betty is on to something. All this silly fighting between the City and the County and the waste.

City Resident:

Stop with the hyperbole. I used to run Ragged Mtn all the time and love it as much as you do. Its not going to be destroyed by the dam, it will be different but not destroyed, so chill with the hyperbole. "untold destruction" seriously, dude its not Comac McCarthy's the Road here, get some perspective.

I certainly didn't start out as a pro-dam/anti dredge person. I am always skeptical of corporations and developers and love nature and am a tree hugger. Like I didn't like the fact that all the commercial gyms in town were trying to shut down the Y, that was just gross corporate greed. But This water business has gone on for a long time. The info has surfaced. The City Councilors are all smart people with good heads on their shoulders. Now the DEQ (see Civille Tomorrow article) is basically saying that the Citizens for water Plan or whatever are the ones obfuscating and Providing inaccurate information:

"Earlier this month Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan used an August 2010 DEQ letter on its website and in communications to local media to claim that dredging South Fork would provide 15.5 mgd.... “This is an inaccurate and inappropriate comparison that can only further confuse the public dialogue regarding the project,” said Kudlas in an email prior to the Hydrologics study."

So it has been the leadership of this group, Citizens for a Sustainable Water Plan, and their tactics that have turned me into a supporter of the dam. They love to fight, imposing their elitist views on everyone else, love to fight with the County. They just can't get over losing and they want to make the whole election about one issue. Norris wants a bunch of dredging puppets on council to undo the walter supply plan and then do his bidding. It makes me wish Schilling was back. That's what's brought me here. The thought of a few people trying to control Council by running a ticket, just makes me wanna puke. Its blatant power grabbing. In addition their leadership and that ticket is not qualified to be on Council by past record.

As to your point about the referendum and the election, you are not listening,. My point is that I don't think its right to have a entire election hijacked by a small group of people about one sour grapes issue, when you could have a referendum to decide the whole thing without polluting the election with puppetry. Look, when the last Council-appointed school board screwed up the supt. search and hiring process and brought on a maelstrom and cost the city 300,00 in buy out, the opponents didn't sit around whining about it for months and months nor did they try to pollute the next election with sour grapes politics and puppets on council. They got the signatures needed, put it on the referendum, then the Council had no choice but to change over to an elected school board.

If your dredging people are so sure of themselves, go run a referendum and stop polluting the waters of our elections. Let's move on and focus on other things like housing, economic growth, unemployment of minorities, improving our educational system for minorities. But that would mean you would have to get more signatures, maybe more than votes on August 20th. Maybe that's the real scam here. Vote away, my votes may well cancel out your votes, but i won;t vote for any one-issue puppets of a Mayor who is just pissed off bec. he lost a vote last year. I think the rest of Charlottesville are grown-ups and know a tantrum, even an electoral one, when they see one.

So far Galvin and Huja seem the most independent and not bound by some dredginista regime. Beyer looks like he has the same potential. Blount might, but looks like she has been swayed to become a puppet, though its not too late and I thought I saw a moment of hesitation tonight at the candidates' debates when Cannon and Smith were doing their silly orchestrated softball questions to each other, when it came time for Blount to do it, she first asked to skip, then she didn't serve up the pablem "what's you closing statement Brevy", she at least gave him a softball question. I thought I saw a moment when she might be having second thoughts of getting into the same Norris bed wit Smith and Cannon-We'll see about that.

ontheroad33 July 21st, 2011 | 1:51am

No downtown mall. Bring back the traffic.

Fiscal nonsense July 21st, 2011 | 2:13am

Kathy Galvin totally dodged a question tonight that people need to keep asking her: You championed a plan to "save money" in the city schools that will indeed save $500,000 a year BUT will cost $40-50 million to fund. How is this in any way, shape or form going to "save money"?? And how will you pay for this grandiose scheme? Which taxes will you increase to pay for it? And how can the city possibly maintain its AAA bond rating by taking on so much debt? And what does this say about the kinds of fiscal decisions you will make on council?

City Resident July 21st, 2011 | 7:27am

CP, supporting the fiscally conservative approach that protects city resources ( dredge first plan) is certainly not the only issue, but it is a test to see which candidates will put their citizens first and not cave into big money special interests.

Your candidates have been willing to swallow the misleading info being spread by these interests and that tells me how they will vote on other issues as well.

They clearly are not independent thinkers

Citizen Party July 21st, 2011 | 4:21pm

@ City Resident: I didn't see any real evidence that the dredging plan will a) save money, b) provide the water we need. See the CT article yesterday on this ("Environmental groups say new study shows dredging is insufficient for water plan", Brian Wheeler, July 19). The test I see is will the candidates put the citizens first by assuring them of a reasonable long-term water supply plan. Both dam versions did that. RWSA and DEQ seem to have issue with the "information" put forward by the Citizens water Supply group. It seems like the County is up for some dredging. I think this whole issue is being manipulated by a few who are presenting questionable facts and confusing the public debate so they have a "big issue" on which to get elected. The agenda seems like it is really "anti-growth. In the end i am confident the voters of Cville will see these tactics and the one issue agenda as not viable credentials for Council.

"My candidates" along with Szakos, and Brown certainly have not been mislead by "big money interests" (who are these big money interests by the way-enlighten)? Have you ever met Kristen Szakos? Tough as nails and independent as one gets. Sorry your corporate conspiracy story doesn't fly.

and yeah, right, the smith-cannon-blounts are "independent thinkers? Did you see the debate last night? Even the DP called them on their prefabricated and sophomoric strategy- yeah real independent. Group think and that tells me how the are going to vote on other issues as well, like the next time we hire a new superintendent.

HarryD July 22nd, 2011 | 7:28am

TERM LIMITS and alternative careers!!

BOO- they already do concentrate on overspending..........

MEANWHILE- so let me get this straight. I live in Charlottesville, pay taxes, etc and you think I should leave because I disagree with you?